APHC010845052017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 35373/2017 Between: 1. V. SWAMY NAIDU, SIO LATE POLAYYA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, WORKING AS BLOCK TECHNOLOGY MANAGER (BTM), OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE (R), MARKET ROAD, NEAR FIRE OFFICE, ANAPARTHI, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI. AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, AGRICULTURE TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (ATMA), NEAR RTO OFFICE, NFCL ROAD, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHAIRMAN, AGRICULTURE TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (ATMA),KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to to issue an appropriate Writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Memo/proceedings No: AP/ATMA/01/2017, dated 10.05.2017 of the 2nd respondent and the consequential proceedings/Memo No: ATMA/45/2017, dated 26.05.2017 of the 3rd respondent to terminating the petitioner without notice as illegal, 2 arbitrary, unjust, contrary to law and violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR AGRICULTURE (AP) The court made the following ORDER:- The writ petition is filed under Art. 226 of Constitution of India, seeking the following main relief:- “……declaring the Memo/proceedings No: AP/ATMA/01/2017, dated 10.05.2017 of the 2nd respondent and the consequential proceedings/Memo No: ATMA/45/2017, dated 26.05.2017 of the 3rd respondent to terminating the petitioner without notice as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to law and violation of principles of natural justice and set aside the same and pass…….” 2. There is no representation for the petitioner. 3. On the other side, G. Naveen, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture, while forwarding a copy of the proceedings dated 09.12.2022 issued by the 3rd respondent submits that consequent to the interim directions dated 26.10.2017, the petitioner joined in service on 28.11.2017 and subsequently, he tendered his resignation on 01.11.2020. Making the said submission, he states that the cause in the writ petition does not survive. 4. From a perusal of the material on record, this Court granted interim direction dated 26.10.2015, to continue the petitioner as Block Technology 3 Manager (BTM), without precluding the respondent authorities from enforcing the conditions of the appointment. 5. In view of the above facts and circumstances that the petitioner was reinstated into service by the respondents pursuant to the interim orders dated 26.10.2015, this Court, keeping in view the non-representation from the side of the petitioner, deems it appropriate to dispose of the matter by making the proceedings dated 09.12.2022 of the 3rd respondent, as part of record. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 24.12.2025 GVK 4 85 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.35373 of 2017 Date: 24.12.2025 GVK